Towergate Software » trademark

IP-Growth Comparison of Fintechs

February 28 2017 tev kofsky charts, funding, IP analytics, patents, trademark 0 comments

Here are comparative growth charts of some Fintech Startups, identified by PrivCo as IPO candidates in 2017. IPqwery charted their overall IP filings (patents plus trademarks) and funding rounds.

For our sample, we chose 4 companies that had a similar number of total IP filings, although the relative number of patents vs trademarks are varied within the group. One additional company (boku) was included as an outlier, having many more filings than the others (the vast majority of them being patents).

Not surprisingly, overall there seems to be a positive relationship between funding and filing activity. Generally, the rate of IP filing increases in close proximity to funding rounds, whether for patents or trademarks. Perhaps naturally, securing IP for any startup may bode well for investors.

5325 0

Cited NFL trademarks: More than just staying off Super Bowl turf

January 25 2016 tev kofsky 2(d) Citation Watch, 2(d) refusals, charts, trademark, USPTO, USPTO examiner 0 comments Tags: trademark refusal, trademarks, USPTO examiner

As others have duly noted (Maurice Ross, David Oxenford) the NFL is zealous in its enforcement over what it deems unauthorized use or infringement of its Super Bowl trademarks. To give added context to this thread, which naturally surfaces at this time of year due to the hype associated with the event itself, we’ve listed all citations of the NFL’s marks over the past five years in the table below, to gain insight into what obstacles applicants face with respect to potential blocking marks owned by the league. To what extent are Super Bowl trademarks being blitzed?

What’s immediately striking is that only 12 citations (listed at the top of the table) refer specifically to Super Bowl trademarks. The vast majority of NFL marks cited have no specific relation to the big game. Given the press the NFL has received over the years regarding its offensive Super Bowl stance, at least from the trademark application perspective the hype does seem overblown. This is not to say that the league’s enforcement activities are unwarranted. Infringement and unauthorized use can be prevalent within the market, nonetheless. But in looking at this list of refused applications, one can’t help but be unimpressed by the foolishness exhibited by some of these applicants. What were they thinking?

Still, there are also some instances where at first glance it seems the examiner was a bit overzealous as well (how about Red Zone Soccer?) We haven’t tracked outcomes, so it’s premature to comment further, but just because these were initially refused doesn’t mean the game ended there.

It’s evident from this analysis (and generally from what we see weekly in our 2(d) Citation Watch) that USPTO examiners provide good defensive zone coverage for all mark owners, not just the NFL. So while it may be true that the NFL is itself aggressive in enforcing trademarks rights within its gridiron, the USPTO is also no slouch when it comes to making sure applicants don’t impinge the trademark rights of others.

5095 0

Which Firms Filed the Most Oppositions in 2015 (& 2014)?

January 19 2016 tev kofsky charts, opposition, Ranked trademark firms, top opposition filers, trademark, ttab 0 comments

Back again is Towergate’s compilation of Top Opposing Firms, based upon the correspondent at filing of all oppositions in 2015. Compared to previous years, there are a number of change-ups in the lineup, and firms not previously noted in our list of years past. Kudos to all!

For the first time, we are showing just the relative rankings of the top 40 opposition-filing firms, without further details given of each of their oppositions. If you’d like further details, please contact us.

One of the most significant changes to note is that the firm Cowan Liebowitz and Latman slipped to second rank, after many years of being the top opposing firm (thanks to MLB). Compared to 2014 and years prior, the firm’s numbers have dropped substantially whilst those of Kilpatick Townsend and Stockton have increased. Kilpatrick’s oppositions have been mainly fueled by owners Instagram, Oracle, and Occulus VR.

2(d) Citations, refusals, and opposition filings are good benchmarks of your firm’s performance relative to other firms within the industry. Subscribe to our popular 2(d) Citation Watch or Bulk TM Watch services and watch your IP practice grow!

Here’s a comparison chart of Top Opposing Firms in 2014.

9333 0

Kudos! Good Call by the Examiner

August 05 2015 tev kofsky 2(d) Citation Watch, 2(d) refusals, trademark, USPTO, USPTO examiner 0 comments Tags: trademark refusal, Uber, USPTO examiner

Here’s a new feature-post that we will be regularly posting. We’ll highlight refusals that the USPTO trademark examiner has made, illustrating why they did so.

Today’s episode: Who is David C. I.* and why should UBER TECHNOLOGIES thank him?

Registered mark UBERCAB (in classes in 9, 38, 39, 42) was cited to refuse the application HANGUBER (class 39). The goods of the proposed mark are described as “Providing taxi transport for people who are incapable of driving safely due to alcohol consumption by driving the intoxicated person and their vehicle to a destination”.

You can see where this is going. But you’ve got to give some creative points to the applicant for the nice play on words they’ve proposed, suggesting hangover in their name.

The examiner states “In this case, the following factors are the most relevant: similarity of the marks, similarity and nature of the goods and/or services, and similarity of the trade channels of the goods and/or services.”

Further, “The respective goods and services need only be “related in some manner and/or if the circumstances surrounding their marketing [be] such that they could give rise to the mistaken belief that [the goods and/or services] emanate from the same source.” In the current case the applicant and the registrant are offering goods and services in the same field of use.”

Seem rather academic? Perhaps the applicant itself was in a stuporous state when their application was filed. The examiner has invoked the “walk the line” test, and the result is clear. Nonetheless, any bets as to where this is headed? Is there a possible route around this obstacle for the applicant to navigate?

* examiner at USPTO Law Office 114

Towergate Software^® aggregates all trademark refusal data each week, both for pending applications as well as the published marks in the TMOG. We pair this data with the actual marks the examiners have used to make those refusals, and publish the results in our popular 2(d) Citation Watch. In essence, any firm or trademark owner can effectively use this watch to monitor their entire portfolio, courtesy of the trademark examiner! Due to its scope, it’s probably the most cost-effective trademark watch available.

5404 0

Making the case to amend USPTO Section 8 deadlines?

September 06 2012 tev kofsky charts, trademark, USPTO, visualization 0 comments

As the PTO is soliciting public comment on the potential amendment to the first filing deadline for Affidavits or Declarations of Use under Section 8 (and Section 71), we’ve compiled some analytics on the actual number of renewals for all trademark registrations filed in 2005. We used this basis-year to indicate the general trend, as the 6-month grace period for Section 8 Declarations of Use would have recently expired on June 30, 2012.

The data was analysed separately for 3 categories, reflecting the basis of registration; 1a, Home Country, and Madrid. The percentage of registrations renewed is shown in the table and chart below.

Is it what you might have expected? Does it make or break the case to amend the Trademark Act to advance the filing deadline to between the third and fourth year from registration?

Here are a couple of alternative views to this data. The first one is a representation of all registrations in the year 2005, with the relative percentages of renewed marks vs. deadwood within the register as of June 30, 2012.

The second chart illustrates the composition of deadwood marks within the register by filing basis, from all 2005 registrations.

See our Services page for more info on Towergate’s unique data mining and watch services.

5978 0

Which Firms Filed the Most Oppositions in 2011?

January 02 2012 tev kofsky 2(d) Citation Watch, 2(d) refusals, charts, opposition, trademark, ttab 0 comments

As many have come to expect, here is our annual compilation of firms that filed the most oppositions in 2011*.

Click on the [+] to expand details for each firm to show all plaintiffs and case links. Aside from the top 3 firms, the differences between most firms are quite close. There are actually 41 firms that filed at least 20 oppositions last year. Also noteworthy is that the top 5 firms represent more than 10% of all oppositions filed.

TowergateTM is our new online search engine with powerful, intuitive and exclusive features found in no other TM search platform. Your search results can now be flagged for marks that have been refused or cited under 2(d), and marks that have been opposed or that have opposed others. You can easily search by virtually any field imaginable, reorder your searches, highlight key terms within the goods & services, cross your queries, get granular control of search terms by adjusting the level of phonetics or by limiting the adjacency of terms, generate customized reports, etc,. It’s how you would construct your own search engine if you could…because we’ve incorporated years of user feedback to reflect how you want it to function!
Ask us for a demo & more info.

Note: The list shown here includes just the top 16 ranked firms. Our complete list of the 41 top ranked firms by oppositions filed (including links to each individual TTAB case) is available. Request your copy.

* Based upon correspondent at filing
<br />

5813 0

Weekly 66a First Office Actions (refused extensions of protection under Madrid)

December 10 2011 tev kofsky 66a 1st office actions, Bulk Trademark Watch, charts, opposition, report, trademark, ttab, visualization 0 comments

Here’s a snapshot of pending (extension of protection of) international registrations filed under section 66(a) that have recently received a first office action (refused). The list is filtered to show only the applications of foreign owners without domestic representation.

Download Report

The report lists the following details; the foreign correspondent, owner and trademark registration. There may be correspondents or owners on the list that you have an existing relationship with or have previously done work for, or perhaps would like to. Why not be proactive and use this information to effectively development more business for your practice?

The partial report viewable here is updated frequently, so check back here again to see more. The full report is available each week by subscription only. Contact us for details.

Note that we can also compile similar reports for business development purposes reviewing domestic petitions for Cancellations and/or Oppositions. Let us know if you would be interested to receive these as well.

And if you’re not already aware of these popular business development tools, check them out…

2(d) Citation Watch – a unique view each week on all marks that have been refused under 2(d), organized by correspondent or by owner. See if any of your marks have been cited by the examiner, potentially blocking new applicants.
Patent Citation Watch – portfolio-wide coverage of your patents for instances when the examiner has cited any of your patents.

6720 0

2(d) Watch among top 10 trademark tools

September 07 2011 tev kofsky 2(d) Citation Watch, 2(d) refusals, trademark 0 comments

We’re happy to announce that the latest World Trademark Review magazine (Oct/Nov ’11) includes an article on “10 of the best online trademark tools“, in which our own 2(d) Citation Watch has been listed. Although technically not an online tool (although it is delivered via email and will eventually be downloadable as well) it further proves that the uniqueness and value of this service is what counts. Copies of the article are available upon request.

5112 0

Category Archives: trademark

Here’s a snapshot of pending (extension of protection of) international registrations filed under section 66(a) that have recently received a first office action (refused). The list is filtered to show only the applications of foreign owners without domestic representation.

And if you’re not already aware of these popular business development tools, check them out…